情绪与决策的关系

该文对情绪与决策关系的研究进行了较为全面的阐述：早期的决策理论完全排斥情绪的影响作用,研究者们热衷于建立理性决策的数学模型;自Kahneman和Tversky提出前景理论后,产生了以预期情绪为主的后悔和失望理论,以及主观预期愉悦理论;20世纪90年代后,随着神经科学和社会心理学家们对情绪与认知关系研究的深入,一些学者意识到决策过程中不仅存在作为效用的预期情绪,还存在“即时”情绪,它们可以在没有认知评估参与的情况下产生,可以反过来影响认知评估,可以直接影响决策行为。     

假言推理判定标准的发展性研究

以充分条件和必要条件假言推理题目为测验材料,对小学四年级、初中二年级、高中二年级和大学二年级共469名被试进行了测量。结果表明:(1)内容和形式两种判断标准从小学四年级就开始发展了,但是小学生和中学生还是根据经验事实来进行判断,直到大学才摆脱经验事实的束缚。(2)必要条件推理的能力发展要早于充分条件推理的能力,而且最后能够达到的水平也要高。(3)被试对规则掌握的先后顺序是肯定前件式、否认前件式、肯定后件式和否认后件式。(4)被试是否受到信念偏见效应的影响,还要看题目是否符合事实以及是否符合逻辑规则。     

What is conceptual research in psychoanalysis?1

The development of psychoanalysis as a science and clinical practice has always relied heavily on various forms of conceptual research. Thus, conceptual research has clarifi ed, formulated and reformulated psychoanalytic concepts permitting to better shape the fi ndings emerging in the clinical setting. By enhancing clarity and explicitness in concept usage it has facilitated the integration of existing psychoanalytic thinking as well as the development of new ways of looking at clinical and extraclinical data. Moreover, it has offered conceptual bridges to neighbouring disciplines particularly interested in psychoanalysis, e.g. philosophy, sociology, aesthetics, history of art and literature, and more recently cognitive science/neuroscience. In the present phase of psychoanalytic pluralism, of worldwide scientifi c communication among psychoanalysts irrespective of language differences and furthermore of an intensifying dialogue with other disciplines, the relevance of conceptual research is steadily increasing. Yet, it still often seems insuffi ciently clear how conceptual research can be differentiated from clinical and empirical research in psychoanalysis. Therefore, the Subcommittee for Conceptual Research of the IPA presents some of its considerations on the similarities and the differences between various forms of clinical and extraclinical research, their specifi c aims, quality criteria and thus their specifi c chances as well as their specifi c limitations in this paper. Examples taken from six issues of the International Journal of Psychoanalysis in 2002‐3 serve as illustrations for seven different subtypes of conceptual research.     

Optimal correction for guessing in multiple-choice tests

Subjects’ decisions in multiple-choice tests are an interesting domain for the analysis of decision making under uncertainty. When the test is graded using a rule that penalizes wrong answers, each item can be viewed as a lottery where a rational examinee would choose whether to omit (sure reward) or answer (take the lottery) depending on risk aversion and level of knowledge. We formalize students as heterogeneous decision makers with different risk attitudes and levels of knowledge. Building on IRT, we compute the optimal penalty given students’ optimal behavior and the trade-off between bias and measurement error. Although MCQ examinations are frequently used, there is no consensus as to whether a penalty for wrong answers should be used or not. For example, examinations for medical licensing in some countries include MCQ sections with penalty while in others there is no penalty for wrong answers. We contribute to this discussion with a formal analysis of the effects of penalties; our simulations indicate that the optimal penalty is relatively high for perfectly rational students but also when they are not fully rational: even though penalty discriminates against risk averse students, this effect is small compared with the measurement error that it prevents.     

Creating coherence in real‐life decision processes: Reasons,differentiation and consolidation

Svenson, O. & Jakobsson, M. (2009). Creating coherence in real‐life decision processes: Reasons, differentiation and consolidation. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 51, 93–102. Differentiation and Consolidation Theory describes human decision making as a process in which attractiveness values are restructured in order to reach a decision and support the decision made. Here, the theory was developed to include reasons pro and con alternatives and tested on students making decisions between two university psychotherapy training programs (cognitive‐behavioral and psychodynamic therapy). Before and also after the decision, the attractiveness of the chosen alternative was upgraded and the non‐chosen alternative downgraded. Different measures of evaluations of an alternative, such as “best” or “worse” converged over time until shortly after the decision. The number of reasons pro and con alternatives give a more complete picture than attractiveness and increased from the first to the last session. The reasons supporting the chosen alternative increased in strength, but reasons against the non‐chosen alternative decreased. In informal comments participants reported that the study also served as a decision aid.